Senator SCULLION (Minister for Community Services) (10:28 PM) —The senator’s presumption that we had not dealt with the violent aspect was incorrect. My assumption that the categories in fact did include the depiction of violence is correct. Both category 1 and category 2 have a depiction of violence as well as sexual activity to put them into those categories. So if it is just violent—there is no sexual activity; it is just something that depicts violence—it will be prohibited as a category 1 or a category 2. So that has been taken into consideration.

With regard to your second question, there has been a lot of discussion. I am not sure about what empirical science you draw on, but certainly a lot of the evidence has been given around the place. The concern about pornography was principally about the grooming of young people. Again, I do not have the capacity or the knowledge to go into any more than what grooming means generally, or preparing or encouraging. I am not sure how you would prepare, but the term used is ‘grooming’ young people to make them more vulnerable to sexual predators.

So the pornographic material was the very first concern. Violence is obviously of concern, and the government have very ably dealt with that. But our first and principal concern was to act in those areas that have been reported. That is why much of the discussion was focused on the sexually explicit material rather than the violent material. The violent material has been comprehensively dealt with in the provision.